Re: pg_terminate_backend

From: Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>
To: postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Subject: Re: pg_terminate_backend
Date: 2006-08-03 16:10:02
Message-ID: 1154621402.21451.74.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

You didn't answer the original question: is killing SIGTERM a backend
known/suspected to be dangerous ? And if yes, what's the risk (pointers
to discussions would be nice too).

> statement_timeout is your friend.

I know, but unfortunately I can't use it. I did try to use
statement_timeout and it worked out quite bad (due to our usage
scenario).

Some of the web requests which time out on the web should still go
through... and we have activities which should not observe statement
timeout at all, i.e. they must finish however long that takes.

I know it would be possible to use a different user with it's own
statement timeout for those requests, but that means we have to rewrite
a lot of code which is not possible immediately, and our admins would
resist to add even more configuration (additional users=additional
connection pool+caches and all to be configured). We also can fix the
queries so no timeout happens in the first place, but that will take us
even more time.

Cheers,
Csaba.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Hammond 2006-08-03 16:11:38 Re: Replication Documentation
Previous Message Zoltan Boszormenyi 2006-08-03 16:06:01 Re: GENERATED ... AS IDENTITY, Was: Re: Feature Freeze